Management by Baseball

What do Hall of Fame baseball managers like Connie Mack & John McGraw have in common with today's business leaders? Why are baseball managers better role models for management than corporate heroes like Jack Welch, Jamie Dimon & Bill Gates? And just what does Peter Drucker have to do with Oriole ex-manager Earl Weaver?
Management consultant & ex-baseball reporter Jeff Angus shows you almost everything you need to know about management you can learn from Baseball.

Tuesday, September 28, 2004

THE CURSE OF THE BUDBINO: MetricsLessons From Playoff Predictions

Too many managers don't know how to handle the metrics their
organizations provide them. Given that absence of understanding,
they are probably not in a position to ask for help creating
better ones, and it's a long reach to the best situation: A
manager designing metrics for the specific group and situation.

It requires numeracy, yes, but a lot of very numerate people
don't have enough craft knowledge to be able to carve out
measures that differentiate the relevant from the less-critical.
Just being numerate is not enough -- understanding context is a
mandatory foundation for success.

There are some great examples of context, both present and
missing, to learn through baseball. With the playoffs coming up,
I thought it'd be particularly cogent to use some examples of
analysis people use to attempt to predict who will win playoff
series.

TRIUMPH OF THE SWILL

My very least favorite form of baseball playoff analysis is
the position-by-position compare and contrast. Because the
match-ups aren't yet jelled, I have no example to point you at,
but if you read daily papers or weekly sports pubs, you're almost
certain to see at least one set of this form that never fails to
subtract from human understanding. The model works off the
assumption that even though the game does not involve individual
duels between each team's player at each position (the way
basketball almost does), that if you match up each team's player
at a position and compare and contrast them, then decide which
team is better off at that position, sort of add up the "in
favor of" count for each side, it will reveal some basic
trend.

It's a basic 7th grader world view: Sheldon had to choose who
to invite to the Supermall on Saturday; Britney is popular with
his peer group, she already has some breast development, and she
knows the name of the Brewers' utility infielder and his batting
average; Kaysie on the other hand doesn't have pimples, is
reputed to make out, gets good grades, and her family has a
well-stocked refrigerator. Britney 3, Kaysie 4. Choice decided.
(By the way, there are lots of adults who make decisions
made on counting, sometimes by weighting and adding-up, more of a
10th grade world view. Most of these adults are male, but not
all. Weight and add-up systems like this can be useful for
examination and discussion and sometimes for winnowing a big
pile of choices to a manageable number, but they're rarely useful
for making a final decision).

Not to pick on the Milwaukee Journal specifically, I present one
of theirs from three years ago (because it was the best
example I could find in ten minutes of searching). Here's
snippets from their analysis, just enough so that if you're not
familiar with the model, you'll get the drift:

World Series:
Position-by-position matchups

Last Updated: Oct. 26,
2001

FIRST BASE

New York's Tino Martinez
vs. Arizona's Mark Grace: Martinez hasn't hit much in the
post-season but is still counted on to be a primary
run-producer for the Yankees. After years of playing with the
foundering Cubs, Grace is finally getting his World Series
spotlight. He doesn't have the same pop as Martinez but is a
solid .300 hitter. Grace had to leave the decisive Game 5 of
the NLCS with a strained hamstring, which could still be a
problem. Edge: Even.

SECOND BASE

New York's Alfonso
Soriano vs. Arizona's Craig Counsell: Soriano is a
special rookie who broke the backs of the Seattle Mariners
with his ninth-inning home run in Game 4 of the ALCS. He also
makes mental mistakes at times. Counsell is one of those
players whose destiny is to shine in the post-season. He
appears to have ordinary skills but produces extraordinary
results in October. Edge: Even.

SHORTSTOP

New York's Derek Jeter
vs. Arizona's Tony Womack: Jeter had a miserable ALCS,
batting .118 with no extra-base hits. That should make the
Diamondbacks very nervous, because Jeter is a fabulous player
who usually does something to win a game or two each series.
Womack has speed but does not get on base enough to fully
utilize it. He has not been much of a factor in the
post-season. Edge: Yankees.

LEFT FIELD

New York's Chuck
Knoblauch vs. Arizona's Luis Gonzalez: Knoblauch plays
left field at times as if he is a converted infielder, which
he is. He still does some nice things, however, such as
batting .333 out of the leadoff spot in the ALCS. Gonzalez
had an uncharacteristically poor showing vs. Atlanta (.211)
and must carry a bigger load against the Yankees. Edge:
Diamondbacks.

CENTER FIELD

New York's Bernie
Williams vs. Arizona's Steve Finley: Williams hit home
runs in the last three games of the ALCS and now has 16
post-season blasts, fourth on the all-time list. Finley
doesn't have the same flair for dramatic blows but is still a
productive player and fielder. Williams just seems to make
his hits count the most. Edge: Yankees.

DESIGNATED HITTER

New York's David Justice
vs. Arizona's Erubiel Durazo: Justice is an experienced
DH who knows how to handle the role. Obviously, no Arizona
players have that background, but Durazo and David Delluci
have been so productive off the bench that this lineup
addition could actually help the D-Backs in New York. Edge:
Even.

STARTING PITCHING

In effect, the Diamondbacks
will try to beat the Yankees with two pitchers: Curt
Schilling and Randy Johnson. Schilling might even go with
three days of rest and be available for Games 1, 4 and 7. No
pitchers have thrown as many pitches this season as that duo,
so you have to wonder how much gas is left in the tank. The
Yankees don't have to resort to such tactics because they go
four-deep with Mike Mussina, Andy Pettitte, Roger Clemens and
Orlando "El Duque" Hernandez. All four have come
through in the post-season in the past. Four arms usually
beat two, even two outstanding arms. Edge: Yankees.

MANAGER

New York's Joe Torre vs.
Arizona's Bob Brenly: Brenly did a nice job this year in
getting the most from a veteran bunch, and has a smart bench
coach in Bob Melvin. But Torre has four World Series rings in
the last five years, almost certainly clinching a spot in the
Hall of Fame. He usually pushes the right buttons, mainly
because he has the most weapons. Edge: Yankees.

INTANGIBLES

The Diamondbacks are to be
commended for getting to the World Series in their fourth
season, the fastest assent ever. And they are an experienced
group that knows what it takes to win. But this World Series
stuff is old hat for the Yankees, who always seem to do the
right things in October. And, with the city recovering from
the horror of Sept. 11, New York has more incentive than ever
to become only the third team with four consecutive crowns. Edge:
Yankees.

PREDICTION

It's going to be
interesting to see exactly how far Schilling and Johnson can
take the Diamondbacks. Arizona better go on top while they
are in the game because the bullpen is a disaster waiting for
a place to happen. New York already has beaten the two teams
with the best records in the majors this year. The Yankees'
record in the last three World Series is 12-1. This one won't
make it back to Phoenix.

Yankees in five.

When you read the individual head-to-heads, you'll see the
writer is capable of good insight. For example, at DH, he doesn't
assume the well-known Series-tested Dave Justice is automatically
better than the young pair Erubiel "The Hermosillo
Hammer" and David Dellucci because his name is more
recognizable. He's open to the youngsters' strengths, too. On
each comparison, he makes reasonably-informed & reasonable
assumptions. A problem is, they are all presented as roughly
equal, and presumed to be additive, as if an Intangible equalled
a 3rd baseman equalled a Bullpen.

There are ten thousand other reasons this doesn't work as a
prescient predictive model, one of the most important being it
compartmentalizes things that should be viewed as complex,
interactive systems. Some things do lend themselves a
little to this kind of breakdown (schoolground basketball for
one, where the head-to-head matchups are likely pretty consistent
during a game, and where one of the matched players can usually
play better in that match-up than the other and if one team has 3
or 4 edges and the other 2 or 1, the outcome will be the
indicated one fairly often).

The subset of politicians who are primarily poll-driven
instead of ideologically-based are prone to this
counting-as-measuring kind of analysis. This position stands to
win X voters in region Y, while the opposite might win N voters
in region Z.

Again, it's not necessarily destructive, just a model that
doesn't work in complex systems (and most important decisions one
makes are about complex systems, not simple ones). Tools that
make us reduce the variables we are going to marinate in and
distill down the number of options for each we will consider are
necessary steps on the way to conclusions. When we reduce and
oversimplify prematurely, though, we are counting on chance to
give us a boost. People who work this way can be veritable
gushers of incompetence.